Frank Denton: Prying open the legal system in the Dunn case

A LOOK AT THE FIRST DUNN TRIAL

Related Dunn coverage

At 9 a.m. Monday, Feb. 3, accused murderer Michael David Dunn is to stand before the bar of justice, personified by a jury of his peers and overseen by Judge Russell Healey.

The nation likely will be watching, as the case involves some larger issues of public interest and importance, much like the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman and Marissa Alexander trials.

When Dunn, a 47-year-old white man, sprayed bullets into a Dodge Durango filled with four black boys, killing 17-year-old Jordan Davis in a dispute over loud music, was he defending himself from a shotgun he said he saw (but which was never found)?

Was he racially profiling the boys as “thugs,” a term he later used for Davis in jailhouse letters? Is “thug” defined by behavior or skin color?

Were the boys racially profiling and threatening him? Did they pick a fight?

Was he legally “standing his ground”?

Because those attitudes, behaviors and questions are part of American consciousness, you’ll likely be discussing the trial around your water cooler.

That is one of the reasons we are covering the case carefully and fully.

Unfortunately, we are having to fight for access to the process preceding and surrounding the trial itself. You should know about our behind-the-scenes work to ensure that you understand the case and its potentially important implications.

Florida law requires that, when “discovery” materials are shared by prosecutors with defense lawyers, they become public records. We may report on that material so the public can understand the background.

However, at the behest of both the prosecution and defense — and without our being allowed to make our arguments — Healey announced that he wouldn’t release such discovery for 30 days so he could review it — pushing public exposure, if any, very close to the trial date.

We and our news partner, First Coast News, appealed that decision, and the 1st District Court of Appeal quickly overruled Healey and told him to immediately review any material specifically identified by the prosecution, defense or him as endangering a fair trial, then release everything he could.

But the judge ignored the order and released nothing, so on Friday, the appeals court sharply ordered him to comply and stop “the ongoing violation of the public’s constitutional right of access to public records.”

Furthermore, in anticipation of extensive media coverage of the trial, Chief Judge Donald Moran appropriately issued administrative rules for reporters and photographers to minimize courthouse disruption while honoring our right to report.

But one of the rules said: “No interviews will be permitted in the first floor atrium of the Courthouse, or in any hallway, courtrooms or any other areas on any floor of the Courthouse.”

That substantially restricts our right to report the news, so our lawyers handed Moran a Supreme Court case saying that an administrative rule of that type is unconstitutional. So far he hasn’t changed his mind.

State Attorney Angela Corey said in an open hearing before Judge Healey that, while she understands what the law says about shared discovery being public record, “We would love to see a change in the law.”

Then in a speech Friday, she admitted her office is trying to keep information from journalists. “The public doesn’t need to know anything about a case before it goes to trial,” she said.

While we might expect some prosecutors and defense attorneys to care only about winning their cases, it is the judge who has the tough job of balancing conflicting constitutional rights — a defendant’s right to a fair trial, with due process of law, versus the public’s freedom of the press, to understand and watch the criminal justice process.

We give careful coverage to such issue-laden trials not only because you’re interested in them — reason enough! — but also for higher purposes.

Our coverage of the Dunn trial likely will provide fuel for your thinking and constructive conversations about issues that may include racial profiling, Stand Your Ground, civil conversation between different kinds of people, culture rage and the ubiquity of guns.

Our coverage will help you understand whether the public is appropriately protected by its criminal-justice system, including prosecutors.

Our coverage should reassure you that criminal defendants are being given due process of law, including a fair trial with appropriate defense.

Our coverage will let you see, understand and probably appreciate how your courts are working.

so lilwrongo - you plaster the personal, confidential information of former co-workers all over this site, in an attempt to defame an outstanding prosecutor with an exemplary work history and you call me names?

you, too, are sad, very sad indeed

the only reason you joined this site was to trash the SA - you've done nothing but claim one bogus downfall after another, ABSOLUTELY none of which came to be - and I'm sure in your twisted little mind, you believe you have done something worthwhile, when in reality you have only made yourself to look the fool with zero credibility

No kidding......thats because it is not completed yet...a matter of fact we just received another new report from an expert last week. The JBPD erroneously informed other agency of the facts and truth due to personal friendships with suspects. This was admitted on interviewtapes.

The documentary will explain, demonstrate showing the real facts with tests, reports and expert testimony by retired FDLE agents, special forces and US Marshall expertise. In addition to forensic pathologists and Dr Raos examination report agreeing with the findings of the experts.

We understand it is taking time for the truth to be exposed but we do gaurantee this case will be uncovered and exposed at its true face value of all the wrongs and rights. Natashas family and friends look forward to our day of Natashas Justice and our proper closure. So much more witnesses and evidence has been uncovered without being allowed our opportunity to provide this case.

I have not asked or used tax payers money...Everything has come from everything I earn. So I guess if you wanr to attack that go for it.

Just think about this for a second.....when the truth is out and the suspect is charged how will you feel about your demeaning hatred toward a young womans life being taken? Personally after losing my child I am numb and do not give a crap or care to take any crap from anyone... period....

One must have a heart to feel at least I still do have that and my dignity for not trying to take justice in my own hands ......as I used to believe in justice, and the system its failed me not once but twice........as I was told one thing to my face while sharing tears, then without being able to face me again before stabbing me in my back..